Muscle-to-Bone Ratio in NCAA Division I Collegiate Football Players by Position

被引:1
|
作者
Dengel, Donald R. [1 ]
Studee, Hannah R. [1 ]
Juckett, William T. [1 ]
Bosch, Tyler A. [2 ]
Carbuhn, Aaron F. [3 ]
Stanforth, Philip R. [4 ]
Evanoff, Nicholas G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Minnesota, Sch Kinesiol, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[2] Athlete Performance Ctr, Red Bull Performance & Data Analyt, Santa Monica, CA USA
[3] Univ Kansas, Med Ctr, Dept Dietet & Nutr, Kansas City, KS USA
[4] Univ Texas Austin, Dept Kinesiol & Hlth Educ, Austin, TX USA
关键词
dual x-ray absorptiometry; body composition; athletics; percent fat; BODY-COMPOSITION; PROFILE; MASS; DXA;
D O I
10.1519/JSC.0000000000004853
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
Dengel, DR, Studee, HR, Juckett, WT, Bosch, TA, Carbuhn, AF, Stanforth, PR, and Evanoff, NG. Muscle-to-bone ratio in NCAA Division I collegiate football players by position. J Strength Cond Res 38(9): 1607-1612, 2024-The purpose of this study was to compare the muscle-to-bone ratio (MBR) in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I football players (collegiate football players [CFP]) to healthy, age-matched controls. In addition, we examined MBR in CFP by position. A total of 553 CFP and 261 controls had their total and regional lean mass (LM), fat mass (FM), and bone mineral content (BMC) determined by dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). College football players were categorized by positions defined as offensive linemen (OL), defensive linemen (DL), tight end, linebacker (LB), running back (RB), punter or kicker, quarterback (QB), defensive back (DB), and wide receiver (WR). There were significant differences between CFP and controls for total LM (80.1 +/- 10.0 vs. 56.9 +/- 7.8 kg), FM (22.2 +/- 12.5 vs. 15.2 +/- 7.1 kg), and BMC (4.3 +/- 0.5 vs. 3.1 +/- 0.5 kg). Although there were significant differences in body composition between CFP and controls, there was no significant differences in total MBR between CFP and controls (18.6 +/- 1.4 vs. 18.8 +/- 1.7). Regionally, CFP had significantly lower trunk MBR than controls (26.7 +/- 2.7 vs. 28.7 +/- 4.2), but no difference was seen in leg or arm MBR. Positional differences in CFP were noted as total MBR being significantly higher in DL (19.0 +/- 1.4) than in DB (18.1 +/- 1.3), WR (18.1 +/- 1.3), and LB (18.2 +/- 1.3). OL had a significantly higher total MBR (19.2 +/- 1.3) than DB (18.1 +/- 1.3), LB (18.2 +/- 1.3), QB (18.1 +/- 1.0), and WR (18.1 +/- 1.3). In addition, RB had significantly higher total MBR (18.8 +/- 1.3) than DB (18.1 +/- 1.3) and WR (18.1 +/- 1.3). This study may provide athletes and training staff with normative values when evaluating total and regional MBR with DXA.
引用
收藏
页码:1607 / 1612
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparison of reporting systems to determine concussion incidence in NCAA Division I collegiate football
    Booher, MA
    Wisniewski, T
    Smith, BW
    Sigurdsson, A
    CLINICAL JOURNAL OF SPORT MEDICINE, 2003, 13 (02): : 93 - 95
  • [22] Physiological Strain Experienced By A Collegiate Mascot During NCAA Division I Football Games
    Triplett, Ashley N.
    Werner, Emily N.
    Guadagni, Alyssa J.
    Collins, Katherine A.
    Petrisin, Susan A.
    Pivarnik, James M.
    MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE, 2024, 56 (10) : 187 - 187
  • [23] Metabolic Syndrome in NCAA Division I College Football Players: A Pilot Study
    Thomas, Joi J.
    Larson-Meyer, Enette
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2013, 45 (05): : 248 - 249
  • [24] Nutritional Knowledge of NCAA Division III Football Players
    Abbey, Elizabeth L.
    Kirkpatrick, Christina M.
    Wright, Cynthia J.
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2015, 47 (05): : 107 - 107
  • [25] Lipid Profiles in NCAA Division I Football Players Compared with Non-Athletes
    Crouse, Stephen F.
    Oliver, Jonathan
    Green, John S.
    Bragg, Amy
    Lambert, Brad S.
    Martin, Steven E.
    Greene, Nicholas P.
    Bramhall, J. P.
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2010, 42 (05): : 751 - 751
  • [26] Current evaluation of mild traumatic brain injury in NCAA division I football players
    Harshbarger, Todd L.
    Bailes, Julian E.
    Courson, Ron
    NEUROSURGERY, 2008, 62 (06) : 1412 - 1412
  • [27] CURRENT PRACTICES AND VARIATION IN THE TREATMENT OF INJURIES IN NCAA DIVISION I COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYERS
    Cook, S.
    McCarty, E.
    Langner, P.
    Gines, J.
    Godfrey, J.
    JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE MEDICINE, 2009, 57 (01) : 232 - 232
  • [28] Comparison of physical and performance characteristics of NCAA division I football players: 1987 and 2000
    Secora, CA
    Latin, RW
    Berg, KE
    Noble, JM
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2004, 18 (02) : 286 - 291
  • [29] THE INFLUENCE OF RATIO AND ALLOMETRIC SCALING PROCEDURES FOR NORMALIZING UPPER BODY POWER OUTPUT IN DIVISION I COLLEGIATE FOOTBALL PLAYERS
    Thompson, Brennan J.
    Smith, Doug B.
    Jacobson, Bert H.
    Fiddler, Ryan E.
    Warren, Aric J.
    Long, Blaine C.
    O'Brien, Matthew S.
    Everett, K. Lee
    Glass, Rob G.
    Ryan, Eric D.
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2010, 24 (09) : 2269 - 2273
  • [30] Mixed Method Examination of the Brain Health of Former NCAA Division I Football Players and Former NFL Players
    Fuller, Samuel
    Jain, Esha
    Nagirimadugu, Newton Venkat
    Turner, Robert W., II
    NEUROLOGY, 2022, 98 (1S) : S1 - S1